Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

FIVE-BY-FIVE

Remember The Biggest XP10 Complaint?

Recommended Posts

XPlane 10 has no buildings in cities and airports....................A YEAR LATER :lol:

 

A321_1_zps8b2e2cfa.png

 

A388_14_zpsf74bb6cc.png

 

KingAirC90B_2_zps21fc067d.png

 



hundreds of addons free or pay...........it's awesome!  The 3 Pics above were all taken with FREEWARE SCENERIES :O

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Awesome! Ordered it on the weekend. Can't wait for it to arrive!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You mean you didn't buy it in December 2011 when I did? Toronto looks very good now-I'll be happy when my part of the world is similar. Anyone heard from Muskoka?-he should be happy about Toronto as I know he did much early work on it 1.5 years ago. I don't think the complaints were ever about a lack of buildings which are and have always been plentiful, but the generic look, lack of unrecognizable landmarks of famous cities, and incorrect land class placement which frankly is still a problem in my part of the world. It is nice to see great freeware work emerging-I wish a pay ware package that would be helpful in this area in a large way would emerge-I'd be the first in line along with much higher mesh and hi res photoscenery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed with Geofa. In small areas XP10 looks great, but most of it still needs a lot of work. It can't be too much to add some autogen to airports and vary buildings by area. So far I'm just restricting myself to nice looking scenery (basically NZ!) but I'd love I fly where I live. Unfortunately Japan currently looks, erm, crap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you apply addons, sure it can look great. But there's no variability in default scenery in different parts of the world, for the most part. Austin Meyer I believe admitted this in an interview recently, and it's something they're working on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes FIVE!  Yesterday I went to DreamHeaven's site and downloaded the Portugal and Europe OSM + Autogen files. Placed them ( I believe in the right order ) in the ".ini" file under Custem Scenery and went flying around Lisbon. Whow!!!! What a difference from even older version of OSM I had!

 

But, strangely, there are other areas where we can notice differences, even if those weren't announced (or at least I was completely unaware of it...). Appart from the sensation that something was done in the core of the flight dynamics code, resulting in a bit more of stability that could account for the sensation that "the torque bug" is slowly vanishing... there is yet another interesting and very welcomed (for me at least...) finding! Apparently the lighting at dusk / dawn, one of my major complaints because of the irrealistic lighting I was seeing near Sun set / Sun rise times, was fixed!  I am making tests around the World and up to this moment all looks pretty plausible to me!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes FIVE!  Yesterday I went to DreamHeaven's site and downloaded the Portugal and Europe OSM + Autogen files. Placed them ( I believe in the right order ) in the ".ini" file under Custem Scenery and went flying around Lisbon. Whow!!!! What a difference from even older version of OSM I had!

 

But, strangely, there are other areas where we can notice differences, even if those weren't announced (or at least I was completely unaware of it...). Appart from the sensation that something was done in the core of the flight dynamics code, resulting in a bit more of stability that could account for the sensation that "the torque bug" is slowly vanishing... there is yet another interesting and very welcomed (for me at least...) finding! Apparently the lighting at dusk / dawn, one of my major complaints because of the irrealistic lighting I was seeing near Sun set / Sun rise times, was fixed!  I am making tests around the World and up to this moment all looks pretty plausible to me!!!

Coul you give the link of that site?

 

Thanks in advance,

 

Francisco Mateos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice pics, but that was never my biggest complaint about XP10...... my biggest complaint was that it hardly ran with an ATI video card; 10 FPS in small GA aircraft, in default scenery, where in a similar setting in another flight sim I reckon I'd have 110 FPS ! :smile:

 

I've still yet to find out whether the awful performance of XP10 with ATI cards has been properly addressed; every time I've asked the question in the XP10 community, I get very ambiguous answers. Shame as I was a big XP9 fan, but after buying XP10 on release, it got sold off due to the huge problem with ATI cards. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Q400_Flyer, that's weird; I ran the demo very smoothly on high settings with a 5870, not to mention your processor is much faster than mine as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice pics, but that was never my biggest complaint about XP10...... my biggest complaint was that it hardly ran with an ATI video card; 10 FPS in small GA aircraft, in default scenery, where in a similar setting in another flight sim I reckon I'd have 110 FPS ! :smile:

 

I've still yet to find out whether the awful performance of XP10 with ATI cards has been properly addressed; every time I've asked the question in the XP10 community, I get very ambiguous answers. Shame as I was a big XP9 fan, but after buying XP10 on release, it got sold off due to the huge problem with ATI cards. :(

 

Hi there. 

I have an ATI 7970 (factory OCd version). Excellent performance in regular games (easily matches and in some cases outperforms the 680), however performance in X-plane is not good. I sometimes see people here at avsim running extreme settings and 100% clouds. That would cause my ATI-card to chug out about half a frame every second century. Add to this incomprihensible shimmering when in HDR-mode (making HDR unusable during day time) and some odd quirks with disapperaing text and other strange anomalies.

 

nvidia sure seems to be numero uno when it comes to flight simming. Will probably be getting the new 780.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only thing I've noticed which has a serious affect on fps is in-game AA. If I keep it on FXAA I can set everything to full and keep frames at above 30fps in most places outside big cities. Move the AA to even the next notch up (2XFSAA&FXAA) and the frames take a hit. 4X and above gets into slideshow territory.

 

Has anyone experimented with nvidia settings for AA?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Q400_Flyer, that's weird; I ran the demo very smoothly on high settings with a 5870, not to mention your processor is much faster than mine as well.

Hi there.

I have an ATI 7970 (factory OCd version). Excellent performance in regular games (easily matches and in some cases outperforms the 680), however performance in X-plane is not good. I sometimes see people here at avsim running extreme settings and 100% clouds. That would cause my ATI-card to chug out about half a frame every second century. Add to this incomprihensible shimmering when in HDR-mode (making HDR unusable during day time) and some odd quirks with disapperaing text and other strange anomalies.

 

nvidia sure seems to be numero uno when it comes to flight simming. Will probably be getting the new 780.

The problems that Richard describe are exactly what I was getting on release.... I was using a HD 5770 1GB at the time to be fair, (and now have a HD 7850 2GB), but it seemed that all of the areas where XP10 performance was claimed to be superior to FSX (mainly around weather and clouds) were just killing it when using an ATI card. I've seen evidence of the great performance in those areas for nVidia users, but for ATI it just doesn't seem beneficial to look at XP10 as a means of enjoying more weather, with good performance.

 

It's a real shame, and has always astounded me that Austin would appear so apathetic towards the ATI issue, when supposedly 30-35% of gamers/simmers have an ATI card in their rig.

 

To be fair, I have not tried the demo, with my new card, so will do that now. :smile:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problems that Richard describe are exactly what I was getting on release.... I was using a HD 5770 1GB at the time to be fair, (and now have a HD 7850 2GB), but it seemed that all of the areas where XP10 performance was claimed to be superior to FSX (mainly around weather and clouds) were just killing it when using an ATI card. I've seen evidence of the great performance in those areas for nVidia users, but for ATI it just doesn't seem beneficial to look at XP10 as a means of enjoying more weather, with good performance.

 

It's a real shame, and has always astounded me that Austin would appear so apathetic towards the ATI issue, when supposedly 30-35% of gamers/simmers have an ATI card in their rig.

 

To be fair, I have not tried the demo, with my new card, so will do that now. :smile:

 

Well.. I wonder if Austin is entirely to blame in this issue. It rather seems like (or so I've heard on numerous occasions) ATIs support of opengl lacks in comparison to nVidia. I wonder if LR could do anything about this issue at all. I don't know. Maybe other people can comment on this?

 

I took the plunge today and ordered the nVidia 780GTX. So hopefully these issues will be just a distant memory soon.  :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


I took the plunge today and ordered the nVidia 780GTX. So hopefully these issues will be just a distant memory soon


I will be really interested to see how your nVidia 780 performs with Xplane 10 and how it compares to the 600 series. Please, please, please post a detailed review (and if possible comparison) of the how the card performs with Xplane 10 when you receive it. It would be very much appreciated.

Right now I am on the fence with whether or not to order the 780 as I have no idea what the performance increase will be compared with a 600 series or ATI card as we all know flightsims don't always behave like other games. With the Volcanic Islands series coming from ATI in Q4 (a complete redesign of the GPU architecture) and the Nvidia Maxwell series coming next year with potential for serious gains (some say doubling in performance of the 780/Titan), I am trying to decide whether to buy a 780, wait for Volcanic Islands, or wait and buy a 660 Ti. I currently have an ATI 5870 which is showing it's age.

 

Cheers

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And, one question... 

 

What exactly is the "logic" of the scenerey_pack.ini file under Custom Scenery? I mean: having downloaded the European OSM+Autogen as well as Portugal and Spain OSM+Autogen files, I placed them in the Custom Scenery folder, but, in the scenery_packs.ini file I believe I should list the Portugal and Spain folders before the Europe folder? Is this correct?

 

@franmavi: sorry, only saw your post after FIVE already had replied :-/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And, one question... 

 

What exactly is the "logic" of the scenerey_pack.ini file under Custom Scenery? I mean: having downloaded the European OSM+Autogen as well as Portugal and Spain OSM+Autogen files, I placed them in the Custom Scenery folder, but, in the scenery_packs.ini file I believe I should list the Portugal and Spain folders before the Europe folder? Is this correct?

 

@franmavi: sorry, only saw your post after FIVE already had replied :-/

like this:

 

SCENERY_PACK Custom Scenery/OSM_Europe_forest+only/

SCENERY_PACK Custom Scenery/Osm_North-America_osm+autogen/

SCENERY_PACK Custom Scenery/Osm_Africa_osm+autogen/

SCENERY_PACK Custom Scenery/Osm_Antarctica_osm+autogen/

SCENERY_PACK Custom Scenery/Osm_Asia_osm+autogen/

SCENERY_PACK Custom Scenery/Osm_Australia-Oceania_osm+autogen/

SCENERY_PACK Custom Scenery/Osm_Central-America_osm+autogen/

SCENERY_PACK Custom Scenery/Osm_South-America_osm+autogen/

SCENERY_PACK Custom Scenery/OpenSceneryX/

SCENERY_PACK Custom Scenery/R2_Library/

SCENERY_PACK Custom Scenery/ruscenery/

SCENERY_PACK Custom Scenery/ff_library_extended_LOD/

SCENERY_PACK Custom Scenery/flags_of_the_world/

SCENERY_PACK Custom Scenery/german_traffic_library/

SCENERY_PACK Custom Scenery/zzz_Treelines_Farms_Europe/

SCENERY_PACK Custom Scenery/zzz_Treelines_Farms_USA/

SCENERY_PACK Custom Scenery/Wide Taxiway Markings Library Replacement/

SCENERY_PACK Custom Scenery/XS_Library/

SCENERY_PACK Custom Scenery/Vehicle Library Extension/

SCENERY_PACK Custom Scenery/z+40+022_GR_Saloniki_gx17/

SCENERY_PACK Custom Scenery/z+47+008_CH_Zuerich_bx17/

SCENERY_PACK Custom Scenery/z+47+011_A_Innsbruck_gx17/

SCENERY_PACK Custom Scenery/z+48+002_F_Paris_bx17/

SCENERY_PACK Custom Scenery/z+52+013_D_Berlin_bx17/

SCENERY_PACK Custom Scenery/z+41+011_I_Roma_gx17/

SCENERY_PACK Custom Scenery/z+41+012_I_Roma_gx17/

SCENERY_PACK Custom Scenery/z+28-015_E_Canarias_gx17/

SCENERY_PACK Custom Scenery/z+30-030_Azoren_x17/

SCENERY_PACK Custom Scenery/z+32-017_P_Madeira_x17/

SCENERY_PACK Custom Scenery/z+43+001_F_Toulouse_bx17/

SCENERY_PACK Custom Scenery/z+43+006_F_Cannes_bx17/

SCENERY_PACK Custom Scenery/z+33+035_LB_Beirut_gx17/

SCENERY_PACK Custom Scenery/z+51-001_GB_London_gx17/

SCENERY_PACK Custom Scenery/z+33+036_SYR_Damascus_gx17/

SCENERY_PACK Custom Scenery/z+43-080_CAN_Toronto_gc17/

 

 

What should be the priority in the scenery_pack.ini file?

The order and thus the priority in the scenery_packs.ini from top to bottom should be as follows:

- Own, or custom airports

- Original airports (e.g. Aerosoft …)

- Regional sceneries (e.g. New Zealand Pro)

- OSM country/continent sceneries

- Addons, libraries (UrbanMaxxExtreme, SeaTraffic, OpenSceneryX…)

- Photo sceneries (ZL16, ZL17, etc.)

- Mesh files (HD Mesh)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I will be really interested to see how your nVidia 780 performs with Xplane 10 and how it compares to the 600 series. Please, please, please post a detailed review (and if possible comparison) of the how the card performs with Xplane 10 when you receive it. It would be very much appreciated.

 

Right now I am on the fence with whether or not to order the 780 as I have no idea what the performance increase will be compared with a 600 series or ATI card as we all know flightsims don't always behave like other games. With the Volcanic Islands series coming from ATI in Q4 (a complete redesign of the GPU architecture) and the Nvidia Maxwell series coming next year with potential for serious gains (some say doubling in performance of the 780/Titan), I am trying to decide whether to buy a 780, wait for Volcanic Islands, or wait and buy a 660 Ti. I currently have an ATI 5870 which is showing it's age.

 

Cheers

 

Steve

 

 

Hehe, I will certainly post some kind of comparison. Don't know about in-depth-reviews though. For flight simming I would recommend nVidia, no doubt. I've had a couple of ATIs and quite frankly, I'm fed up with ATI. I'm hoping the 780 will be a much needed breath of fresh air. 

 

There's always something new around the corner. I'm having a hard time believing that ATI will, during Q4, release something twice as powerful as a GTX780. I think it will be more of a catch-up. Time will tell. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I too experienced horrible performance with my ATI card in XP10 demo, as in less then 10fps most of the time on high settings. Switch to an equivalent nVidia card and frame rates changed a 30fps range with ease.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What should be the priority in the scenery_pack.ini file?

The order and thus the priority in the scenery_packs.ini from top to bottom should be as follows:

- Own, or custom airports

- Original airports (e.g. Aerosoft …)

- Regional sceneries (e.g. New Zealand Pro)

- OSM country/continent sceneries

- Addons, libraries (UrbanMaxxExtreme, SeaTraffic, OpenSceneryX…)

- Photo sceneries (ZL16, ZL17, etc.)

- Mesh files (HD Mesh)

 

A slight tweak (shift New Zealand scenery to the bottom because it is mesh)

Basically airports should go at the top, followed by facades, then orthophotos, and lastly mesh.

 

The order and thus the priority in the scenery_packs.ini from top to bottom should be as follows:

- Own, or custom airports

- Original airports (e.g. Aerosoft …)

- Global Airports (this folder was added in X-Plane 10.21)

- OSM country/continent sceneries & forest overlays (these are facades)

- Photo sceneries (ZL16, ZL17, etc. anything from simheaven and friends)

- Regional sceneries (e.g. New Zealand Pro)

- Mesh files (HD Mesh)

 

 

Addons, libraries (UrbanMaxxExtreme, SeaTraffic, OpenSceneryX…) can be in any order ... it does not matter, since X-Plane loads these first internally regardless of what order you put them in the file.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, and just 1 more question... 

 

Under the "class" of OSM country/continent sceneries (these are facades), if I have, say:

 

Osm_Europe_osm+autogen     and     Osm_Portugal_osm+autogen

 

how should I declare them in the "scenery_packs.ini" file?  Portugal first and then Europe?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, and just 1 more question... 

 

Under the "class" of OSM country/continent sceneries (these are facades), if I have, say:

 

Osm_Europe_osm+autogen     and     Osm_Portugal_osm+autogen

 

how should I declare them in the "scenery_packs.ini" file?  Portugal first and then Europe?

not sure.....experiment and see which one needs to go first :good:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My issues with XPX:  poor ATC and (absence of) AI traffic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 (absence of) AI traffic.

XP10 default AI Traffic had a limit of 20 Aircraft per Airport but already fixed....addon released weeks ago

 

World Traffic

Fill the skies with planes!   The most significant application for X-Plane since ... X-Plane!

World Traffic is an application designed to fill the skies and taxiways of your favorite airports with lots of planes.

You can even create land and sea traffic.  Flight paths are defined through flight plans which are simple to create by specifying the aircraft in the flight and  some flight parameters. Arrivals and departures are controlled by World Traffic based on wind and aircraft type info so that aircraft will land and takeoff from suitable runways. 

 

General Features

 

  • Sample flight plans and ground routes are provided for KSEA. These illustrate almost all of the functionality of the application and may be used as examples for your own flights.
  • Several default aircraft are provided with many more to come. Users may create their own aircraft as well.
  • Flight plans can be grouped into zones to enable/disable flights for a specific region or to enable/disable flights for a specific vintage of aircraft. You can organize the flight plan folders however you wish and enable or disable whatever regions you are interested in.
  • Custom sound engine with directional, multi-track aircraft engine sounds with doppler shift.
  • Simple ATC system to allow you to interact with the World Traffic application so that it is aware of your position and can vector you and and assign you arrival/departure runways.
  • Flight information window allows you to quickly find active flights, flight information about that flight, and it lets you view that flight with the track camera.
  • Collision avoidance features for ground traffic so aircraft hold for approaching and departing aircraft, aircraft will overshoot if they are too high or too fast or if there is a plane on the runway, and planes will enter holding patterns if the airport is too busy or their crosswind landing limit is exceeded.

Flight Plans

 

  • User-defined flight plans to specify the flight path of an aircraft or a formation of aircraft.
  • Settable altitudes for each steerpoint in the flight plan where altitude can be in feet above sea level or feet above ground level for terrain following flights.
  • Flight plans can be defined for specific aircraft tail numbers so that a specific aircraft can be defined to follow a multi-leg route.

Ground Routes

 

  • User-defined ground routes to specify specific parking locations for aircraft. Ground routes can be specific to a general type of aircraft, a type of aircraft, or a specific tail number so you can have planes park in the parking spots you want

Flight Model

 

  • Simple, tunable flight model using aerodynamics and ballistics equations from the NASA web site to provide a natural looking flight model accurate enough that you can follow the World-Traffic controlled aircraft.
  • Wind and turbulence affect aircraft so that they will bounce around in turbulence and crab into the wind in flight to maintain desired headings.
  • Afterburner thrust is settable so afterburner-equipped aircraft can accelerate quickly when required, perform vertical departures, and fly supersonic.

Aircraft Object Animation and Lighting

 

  • Custom datarefs are provided to provide your aircraft with full animation of control surfaces, landing gear, canopy, nozzle, engine blades/prop, thrust reverser, lights etc.
  • All types of aircraft lighting is supported and the lights will function correctly depending on the phase of flight and aircraft type. Landing lights will go on and taxi lights will go off when the aircraft taxis onto a runway for takeoff. The strobe lights will turn off when the plane arrives and turns off the runway. Cabin lights will stay and aircraft doors will stay open for a few minutes after an airliner parks until the passengers are all off the plane. Most other lighting turns off when the aircraft engines are shut down.

Planned Features

  • Random traffic generation based on an airport definition file specifying traffic type, connecting airports, and traffic volume to allow you to quickly generate air traffic for your favorite areas.
  • Import tools to convert flight plans in other popular formats to work with World Traffic and to get real-world flight plans off of the web.
  • Custom approaches for SID/STAR approaches from the web or your own custom approaches for arrivals and departures into mountainous areas.

Created by Greg Hofer for Classic Jet Simulations

 

 

PRICE:  $24.95

$24.95 World Traffic(License Key sent by email by CJS)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites